CASAA: New study confirms that chemicals in electronic cigarettes pose minimal health risk

[BuGlen]

An article on the CASAA study which has been funded through donations by many of us here on ECF. I particularly like the third paragraph in the article:

By reviewing over 9,000 observations about the chemistry of the vapor and the liquid in e-cigarettes, Dr. Burstyn was able to determine that the levels of contaminants e-cigarette users are exposed to are insignificant, far below levels that would pose any health risk. Additionally, there is no health risk to bystanders. Proposals to ban e-cigarettes in places where smoking is banned have been based on concern there is a potential risk to bystanders, but the study shows there is no concern.

CASAA: New study confirms that chemicals in electronic cigarettes pose minimal health risk - MarketWatch

 

[Vocalek]

Also available here:

Breaking News: New study shows no risk from e-cigarette contaminants | Anti-THR Lies and related topics

There is a link to the full study.

 

[TampaToker69]

This is wonderful!

 

[kristin]

Link on CASAA's web site: CASAA: New study confirms that chemicals in electronic cigarettes pose minimal health risk

 

[AgentAnia]

This should be a HEADLINE ALL-CAPS banner! A global ALL-CAPS stickie! We should be shouting this from the rooftops! And we should be encouraging every ECF member to contribute to the CASAA research fund.

(BTW the url from the press release got me an error message, whereas the url in Carl Philips' blog worked. FYI)

EDIT: And everybody should tweet this and post on facebook and everywhere else!

 

[Vocalek]

This should be a HEADLINE ALL-CAPS banner! A global ALL-CAPS stickie! We should be shouting this from the rooftops! And we should be encouraging every ECF member to contribute to the CASAA research fund.

(BTW the url from the press release got me an error message, whereas the url in Carl Philips' blog worked. FYI)

EDIT: And everybody should tweet this and post on facebook and everywhere else!

I figured out what the problem was. When you copy/paste the link from MarketWatch, you must make sure that you don't have a period at the end.

 

[AgentAnia]

Oh damn, the pesky punctuation mark again! Thanks for the heads up.

 

[Bill Godshall]

The study is at:
http://publichealth.drexel.edu/SiteData/docs/ms08/f90349264250e603/ms08.pdf

 

[Vocalek]

Suggestion: The next time you come across a news story online that says something like "We don't know what's in them" or "They haven't been studied," or ...well you get the picture. Leave a comment, positing the link to the full study.

http://publichealth.drexel.edu/SiteData/docs/ms08/f90349264250e603/ms08.pdf

"http://publichealth.drexel.edu/SiteData/docs/ms08/f90349264250e603/ms08.pdf"

 

[Johnny101]

That's good news

 

[TLS01]

Something most of us that don't have blinders on already knew just by reading unbiased articles, CASAA and experiencing the difference in our health.

 

[BuGlen]

Suggestion: The next time you come across a news story online that says something like "We don't know what's in them" or "They haven't been studied," or ...well you get the picture. Leave a comment, positing the link to the full study.

http://publichealth.drexel.edu/SiteData/docs/ms08/f90349264250e603/ms08.pdf

"http://publichealth.drexel.edu/SiteData/docs/ms08/f90349264250e603/ms08.pdf"

Actually, I would probably recommend the press release link on the CASAA site that Kristen provided in comments to articles. Mainly because most people have a very short attention span and there is quite a bit of information in the actual study document (which I have yet to read through). The press release rebuts most of the arguments we're seeing from the misinformed in the comments sections and provides a link to the actual study for those who want more information.

Also, while people are reading the PR on CASAA, they can browse some other good information and maybe join as well.

 

[AgentAnia]

I've also bookmarked Carl Phillips' Anti-THR Lies blog post on the study for referral (as an "independent" third-party referral), as some folks tend to discount press releases as a priori biased.

EDIT:

Also, while people are reading the PR on CASAA, they can browse some other good information and maybe join as well.

Your point is excellent!

 

[Ardo]

 

[Vocalek]

Aitäh, Ardo.

 

[RosaJ]

Yes, yes, yesss!!!

 

[Elnroth]

Time to post this everywhere

 

[Ardo]

Aitäh, Ardo.

Wow, Elaine. That's nice

 

[leech213]

So awesome to hear!!!!

 

[DaveP]

Having scanned the documented test results, it's unclear how the PPM ratings for chemicals in vapor relate to clean air, air on a city street, or air quality allowed in various public buildings. I guess what I'm asking is if anyone knows how the results compare to exposure from just walking down the street on a given day.

Most were in the .00x PPM range. I'm thinking that it's practically nothing, but there were additional calculations in the rightmost columns that really didn't provide clarity to the test results. I'm wondering if those were considered trace results or additions caused by atomization of eliquid. Most, if not all, seem to be within the allowed ranges.